Re: [Mutt] #2747: imap_keepalive ignored when less than timeout and

#2747: imap_keepalive ignored when less than timeout and too much idle -+-- Reporter: rado| Owner: brendan Type: defect | Status: closed Priority: minor | Milest

Re: [Mutt] #2747: imap_keepalive ignored when less than timeout and

#2747: imap_keepalive ignored when less than timeout and too much idle -+-- Reporter: rado| Owner: brendan Type: defect | Status: assigned Priority: minor | Milest

Re: [Mutt] #2747: imap_keepalive ignored when less than timeout and

#2747: imap_keepalive ignored when less than timeout and too much idle -+-- Reporter: rado| Owner: brendan Type: defect | Status: assigned Priority: minor | Milest

Re: [Mutt] #2747: imap_keepalive ignored when less than timeout and

#2747: imap_keepalive ignored when less than timeout and too much idle -+-- Reporter: rado| Owner: brendan Type: defect | Status: new Priority: minor | Milest

Re: [Mutt] #2747: imap_keepalive ignored when less than timeout and

#2747: imap_keepalive ignored when less than timeout and too much idle Changes (by brendan): * reporter: [EMAIL PROTECTED] => rado -- Ticket URL:

Re: [Mutt] #2747: imap_keepalive ignored when less than timeout and

#2747: imap_keepalive ignored when less than timeout and too much idle Changes (by perkinjo): * cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (added) Comment: It looks like this comment is a proposed fix. I've downloaded the nightly tarball on 2008-04-05 and it looked like this patch was not applied. Is there an

Re: [Mutt] #2747: imap_keepalive ignored when less than timeout and

#2747: imap_keepalive ignored when less than timeout and too much idle Changes (by brendan): * owner: mutt-dev => brendan * priority: critical => minor * milestone: => 1.6 Old description: > {{{ > When you set "imap_keepalive" < IMAP-server-timeout < "timeout", > then IMAP-server will